Bitcoin Forum

I just saw this thread trending on CryptoCurrency subreddit and found this reply by a guy who says he's one of the OG on Bitcoin Talk forum.
According to him:


https://talkimg.com/images/2024/02/27/YqiVJ.png

Give it a read, I think I am kind of convinced, I always thought Satoshi was Hal Finney. I would love to know what you guys think about this.
Would love to hear some more stuff from OG members.

And here is a link of emails which are released by Sirius titled Satoshi - Sirius emails 2009-2011: https://mmalmi.github.io/satoshi/
I have gone through all of these and I am sure someone with more knowledge and understanding can find out who Satoshi actually was.
Really interesting convo.

Think about it though: if someone wanted to really be anonymous, would he put in small hints on who he/she is through his/her  anonymous monicker? Obviously not as it would totally be a bad idea. The S-N thing is likely just a coincidence.

It's not noticed by a lot but most of the fake identity that we use to fabricate an online presence is subconsciously connected to you somehow, some might think that it's not because it's mostly words. The small hints probably aren't for the people that he'll meet online, it's probably for those close to him, someone that knows them personally and with those small hints, they'd be able to identify them, kind of like their very own secret or something like that.

Most people have already figured it out but choose not to commend about the subject on this public forum because it was SN's original request to stay anonymous.

So with that in mind, we really need to respect their request.

I don't know about Nick Szabo but about Hal Finney who passed away by a disease, there is an article from Jameson Lopp in which he proved that Hal Finey is not Satoshi Nakamoto. Honestly, I am quite convinced that Hal is not Satoshi after reading it.

Why Hal Finney was not Satoshi Nakamoto? (https://blog.lopp.net/hal-finney-was-not-satoshi-nakamoto)

I don't think so no one could provide evidence of who is Satoshi and honestly anyone can be Satoshi they can create their own story from the information available on the internet and use that to fool other people that they are Satoshi Nakamoto.

Unless the admin and co-admin of this forum who are the first people who spoke with Satoshi confirmed that this man is Satoshi Nakamoto but it's not and I'm sure if Satoshi is alive or not he does not want his life to be in public and don't want to be chase by the government.

The post and those letters look quite convincing, to an extent they make me believe who are the real people behind that pseudo name Satoshi Nakamoto. I always believed that Satoshi Nakamoto was not one single individual, there should be a group behind it or a few individuals. The reason I feel intrusive is due to the person who claims to be an OG of Bitcointalk. This individual is attempting to solve a mystery that I was never interested in uncovering. I have always found nature beautiful, and I don't see the need to dig the earth. Unfortunately, this anonymous user has destroyed my curiosity.

As for me, I agree with mk4 reply on this thread.


I agree with his understanding of those revelations, which does question the authenticity of the post. To remain anonymous in those days was the best option to stay away from the CIA and FBI.

As far as I am concerned, everybody is a Satoshi Nakamoto, case closed, whatever clues that might be put together will still end in a dead end, because anyone including the original Nakamoto himself can carry the identity of others, maybe the SN was even a fake name, who knows?

This person want to stay hidden and get all the proud ness and glory to himself without revealing who he is to the world, and imagine that, you becoming successful at what you do and you can't show the world, this man is a rare being, someone who knows what is coming with the existence of Bitcoin and the government.

I don't care to know, I don't even want to know who SN really is, what he built is working, that's all, imagine know who he is and everything he build are total failure?

But why are we always trying to find out Satoshi's real identity when he decided to remain anonymous forever? Haven't we always said that we respect him, we respect his decisions and that he has chosen to remain anonymous forever but we are always hunting him? Do we really respect him? Furthermore, if we find out his true identity and if that puts him in danger (if he is still alive). So what do we do next? Personally, I hope none of us know who he is, that's what he wants and I'll respect that.

Same here! I don't know about Nick Szabo. I already read that news about the identification about Hal Finey. Yes, Hal Finey isn't Satoshi Nakamoto. Hal Finey and Satoshi Nakamoto were very close friend. Both are also a programmer. Their best contribution is Bitcoin. Here @thymos represents their existence.

I try to research the name of the guy mentioned and the result is this

Got the source from google, but I don't know if I pick the right person and this is the link to know more about him https://blockchainjungle.com/blogs/speakers/nick-szabo

But honestly I don't know this guy, he just pop up into some discussion and maybe there are people just to stir out things then point another entity then call that he is the real Satoshi Nakamoto. Until no proof provided maybe its better not to believe on such story since as been said anyone can claim that they are Satoshi Nakamoto.

I meant I read about Nick Szabo in the past but I am not sure he is (or is not) Satoshi Nakamoto. It is different than the article from Lopp that is very detailed and has enough information for me to believe Hal Finney is not Satoshi Nakamoto.

If you don't know, Satoshi Nakamoto used to post his real name and address in Bitcointalk.

I myself was extremely surprised that one of the creators of our forum is Satoshi Nakamoto, it turns out that our forum is a kind of museum and this is the reason that the design of the site and its functionality do not change. I didn't understand this conservatism before.

Satoshi was a genius, an economist, a strong programmer and a man who understood human psychology perfectly. I think he was cooler than Elon Musk and Leonardo da Vinci, because he was really able to make an idea that could get such a spread.

If Satoshi himself posted his real name and address on a public forum within the community, that means someone here still knows who he is and if he is still alive or not.
What if the guy in the comment section of the reddit post, the one who consider himself OG member of the forum, knows that Nick is Satoshi? Kinda interesting tbh.

This is just one of the mysteries surrounding the identity of the creator of Bitcoin, the concept is merely another theory. The pseudonymous nature has sparked numerous speculations over the years, with many notable figures in the cryptocurrency space being viewed as possible candidates.

This debate has been ongoing within the crypto community for a long time. While some individuals have made contributions to the industry, it does not necessarily mean they are Satoshi Nakamoto. The true identity of Satoshi Nakamoto continues to be one of the most enduring mysteries in the realms of technology and finance.

I don't know what is topic #3, it gone forever already. No information that who deleted that topic. Did Satoshi delete it by himself or later admins delete it like sirius, theymos?

The topic number means it is very earliest one and very few people knew about it and still alive today.  :D

Nick is Satoshi, interesting if someone can provide more information about that.

Satoshi Nakamoto tried to mix his writing between European style and USA style. It is abnormal and it seems Satoshi Nakamoto intentionally did it to hide his nationality.

Personally I don't care real identity of Satoshi Nakamoto and wish that nobody will find him.

Whoever he is, It's not CSW. He should stay anonymous and we should respect his privacy. Let CSW waste his money and let the lawyers make some money from him. It's not like we are paying attention to this stupid. I am not a old forum members and I haven't been around when Satoshi was active. I didn't do any research about him. But, It's obious that a lot of people tried to find out who is Satoshi. Probably theymos has a hint. But, let's respect their privacy. Satoshi is not dumping any single Satoshi. So, I don't think we should poke him every few days.

Of course, people can lie about things, but Nick Szabo denied being Satoshi Nakamoto, and so did Hal Finney. I think we should take it into account, and I tend to believe both of them. Leonard Sassaman is the only one among these three of whom I don't remember hearing before. I can see that there were allegations about him potentially being Satoshi before, but since he committed suicide, we'll likely never know that.
To be honest, I don't think it's important to know who Satoshi is/was. Satoshi is the creator of Bitcoin, and remaining unknown is good for the ultimate decentralization of Bitcoin.

Damn I wasn't expecting to see the post of Satoshi himself in the quote from @theymos, I had goosebumps reading through the replies, after all these years Satoshi has been a mystery unsolved. What if he is still amongst us in the forum? What if he is watching us through a guest or probably a secret account? I guess we will never know.

Honestly it’s possible. We are all just humans. We are vulnerable and we are not invincible. More often than not, we don’t realize that we have made some slip-ups. Maybe it’s not his intention to leave a hint.

Although it’s also plausible that it might have been just a coincidence but there were some emails exchanged between them. Of course those could easily be forged but it all depends on us what we want to believe in.

I get why people might suspect Nick Szabo, but speculating beyond that is pointless, IMO. How does ThatInternetGuy knows such details as to who wrote the code? If I had to guess a candidate, then it'd be Nick but only Nick. In this little research (https://likeinamirror.wordpress.com/2013/12/01/satoshi-nakamoto-is-probably-nick-szabo/), the author has found out similarities between Nick's writing character and Satoshi's, therefore concluding he might have written the whitepaper and forum posts, but it is also known that Nick has had quite a good expertise in C++. Just because Len committed suicide at about the same time satoshi stopped posting, does it mean it was him? Of course not.

until now there is still a lot of debate surrounding the name "satoshi nakamoto" some say that it was an individual or a group. but whatever it is, the most important thing is how bitcoin has developed to where it is today and introduced us to a sophisticated and decentralized transaction system. whoever the creator is and whatever he does is something that is no longer too important to discuss, because satoshi nakamoto has decided to be anonymous and leave the bitcoin space and we have to respect that.

Some people think that they have figured it out.


With this part I agree. One of the biggest Bitcoin advnatges is the anonymity of its creator and I don't think that anything good could come out of finding out who really was behind all this.

A while back I wrote a topic [1] on why identifying SN would not be in our best interest. I recommend giving it a read.

Identifying this individual would provide governments worldwide with a tangible target for scrutiny, beyond mere anonymity. The potential repercussions include a surge in negative publicity and unfounded allegations against the newly revealed persona. Despite the speculative nature of any accusations, the community could face an unprecedented wave of FUD.

[1] https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5349129.msg57454873#msg57454873 (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5349129.msg57454873#msg57454873)

No one knows for sure, period.  No we do know that its not Craig Wright, but outside that it could be a combination of quite a few cryptographers. 

Here's an interesting story I read recently/happened to randomly come across.  Now no one knows for sure who Satoshi is, which is part of his genius.  I personally think it's Nick Szabo for many reason.  I've actually spoken with Craig Wright and Szabo individually on twitter, and Craig jut doesn't give me that vibe.

Szabo created bitgold /coined the term smart contracts etc.  He' an economist, cryptographer, etc..and he just fits the bill.  Plus Szabo is a bit of an asshole, and I hear Satoshi was much the same in forum PMs.  You could tell he was a bit brash just from his forum posts too.


https://i.ibb.co/C6CGP5M/image.png (https://imgbb.com/)   

(what an iconic/legendary photo.  Including our  own forum mod Greg Maxwell.  If you haven't read his posts, or his blog, I highly recommend it.  We are very lucky to have him here!!

https://www.experiencelab.info/2018/06/unveiling-bitcoin-team-led-by-nick.html?m=1  (for the record I believe this article to be total bullshit, but who knows).

If you read what Wikipedia says about him then you’ll see that he has denied being satoshi on several occasions. Btw, I also saw another article about the Op and I think that’s where this so called TheInternetGuy got the idea from that Nick Szabo is satoshi Nakamoto and then he decides to go online and just write as if he and Nick discussed about it where it got confirmation. I don’t think this is something worth debating on.

If not for this thread I don’t think I would have even know that someone called Nick Szabo exists. ;)

Why you think Hal Finney is the Satoshi, while he himself said he is not the Satoshi he also mentioned Satoshi is some Japanese dude in one of his last posts on Bitcointalk, you should check this thread if you haven't read it yet I hope this is enough to give you an idea that Hal was not Satoshi, he was also door knocked on by the CIA or whatever agency was, you can read the news anywhere by using some keywords. The point is, that Hal is not Satoshi. Now talking about your post of Reddit.

I would be convinced but it might be another story to cover up real  Satoshi as many crypto users are doing it, as they have been left with no other choice, what I don't understand is, what bad could happen if real Satoshi came in from to public eyes, will he/she be in any kind of danger as things are out of his/her hands now. So, considering this fact, I also think Satoshi is no more, as you said two dudes the one who wrote WP and the other who wrote the code are both dead now. I find it sad if it's real then this should not have happened, things should have not gone like this. But if it's fake, then no prob.

It's possible that Satoshi would have just created Bitcoin and publicly released his identity, but he didn't, and I think his reason was to keep Bitcoin decentralized. If at all Satoshi Nakamoto were two individuals who wanted to keep a trace of their identity, long before now, they would have been discovered because the government itself is looking for every possible lead to uncover Satoshi's identity. 

Sometimes I used to ask myself: if Satoshi was really alive and had those millions of bitcoins in his wallet, would he not have felt tempted to look for means to access his fortune? I just concluded that Satoshi is dead. 

This story seems quite convincing, but it would have been uncovered right after Bitcoin price reached $1k or when
 began to become popular in the spaces

When you do not know anything about, who is Satoshi Nakamoto ?

then it is better for you all to stop speculating.
Search in the meta data and you will find his IP, search the  account
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=1
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=2
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=3

Ask the experts to search if you are not metadata expert.

Otherwise you have to wait until Satoshi's situation change.

non of those developers is Satoshi Nakamoto.  They are just bunch of opportunists.

Stop speculating and leave Satoshi alone, if you do not care at all about a man who
has created this bitcoin blockchain and you all are exploiting it and living a luxury life
with bitcoin money, while Satoshi is suffering very badly.

No disrespect to your thoughts but I feel Satoshi Nakamoto is a mystery and very much anonymous and that's the reason he created Bitcoin which follows the similar protocols about hiding one's identity and I don't think we will be able to figure out who he really is, and this name Satoshi Nakamoto itself night be a pseudonym used by the person whom we are referring as Satoshi Nakamoto. We may see such news about mail exchanges and similar ones even in the future like how we have seen in the past but I don't think anyone can find about much about Satoshi Nakamoto but will be always remembered for the revolutionary idea and invention of Bitcoin.

I don't really care, like many others, who Satoshi is. The reddit post provides a funny speculation, which seems reasonable and of course you did well to create a topic just for fun. But god, we have tooooo many topics like this. Anyway!

Let's speculate once more (because we secretly like speculating):

If Nick Szabo is the whitepaper guy, how can we explain the brittish spelling? The brittish spelling is also curious, because if you observe the emails, Satoshi uses a ton of American English words, like "newbies" etc.

So, my speculation would be that Adam Back wrote the whitepaper and Nick Szabo wrote the code. And then, Nick Szabo was answering the emails etc.

You are wrong  when you say, ''I don't think we will be able to figure out
who he really is, and this name Satoshi Nakamoto''

your word ''we'' is excluding me. Satoshi Nakamoto has read this thread, and he knows
who is speculating for secret motives and who is just really have no clues. yes you all know his
Japanese pseudonym but there are 70 people in the Bitcoin community know his real identity
but won't like to admit because they are working for governments' secret service.  

Bitcoin inventor chose a Japanese pseudonym does not mean he is Japanese, he cited Adam Back's
HashCash and Wei Dai's name in the Reference no.  1.  in the Bitcoin White Paper does not make
Adam Back or Wei Dai the writer of Bitcoin White Paper.

Satoshi met Hal Finney when he travelled with Wei Dai in London on 26 October 2008. Satoshi met
Nick Zsabo and Bitalik Butterin in 2015 in London for the first time in DevCon. and Craig Wright in
2018 in London.

Satoshi has been cornered by the governments agents
those who have hijacked his Bitcoin project from him.

They are running this forum and Bitcoin Blockchain.

They say ''we are all Satoshi.''

Satoshi is visible but unseen
to the blind media reporters.

you  need to understand
the phrase -

I am, 'Satoshi Nakamoto'

I am not alone.

A Samurai is a Samurai.
No matter where
he was born ?

Satoshi is an Immortal,
He is not one of you
in the Bitcoin Forum.

He is just a pseudonym
to you you all.

but to me -
I am, Satoshi Nakamoto.

I am myself.

Search and
you will find
Satoshi.  



  




 






 

 

Satoshi is a legendary figure already, however not enough time has passed for people to really realize how big of a legend he is and how big he will become, take a look at the disappearance of Amelia Earhart, almost 90 years have passed since she disappeared and there are still people looking for her, Satoshi in my opinion will be way bigger than her as I have no doubts that at some point in time he will become the richest person alive and maybe even the first trillionaire, so I can assure you that there will always be someone looking for Satoshi trying discover his real identity for the foreseeable future.

The information shared by that guy on reddit is very informative to say the least, but then, I am wondering why he is no longer posting on this forum if he was once here, he could have been a good asset to this forum, as most of us would have loved to learn more from his experience as a true bitcoin OG who must have had some private connection with satoshi, because, I personally do not believe that the guy would know much as he knows without some internal private connections with those guys he mentioned on his reddit post.

Anyways, that is if all he said is true though, because for me, the mystery around who Satoshi Nakamoto is; is still yet unsolved, and I doubt it will ever be solved.

These are some interesting revelation especially, the quote from Theymos about a forum section having some posts and the possibility of some identity revealing text.
It might be possible that this was the case with the fact that, this was the early days of the innovation with it still looking to gain prominence in the digital world and finance at the time.

Even still, I have doubts as Satoshi Nakamoto was well aware of most, if not all of the reasons that constituted the failure of the early digital currency projects, well enough to prioritize safety, privacy and security on all ends, not just for the human entity’s sake but for the future of Bitcoin itself.

That doesn't make sense, in my opinion. Adam Back recently leaked his conversation with Satoshi, in which Satoshi presented him the whitepaper. If Adam was into Satoshi group, why would this conversation even exist? Faking a private conversation like that seems far-fetched.

Sounds more plausible that Nick used a British word or two to cover himself up. He had to switch to another writing style anyway.

---

Can somebody answer me these questions of mine? So, in this blog post (http://unenumerated.blogspot.com/2005/12/bit-gold.html) Nick Szabo demonstrates bit gold, the direct precursor to Bitcoin. I think I made somewhat of a discovery, but it's probably me having insomnia, so forgive me if they're already presented before.

• Why does the blog post's date say "December 27, 2008", whereas in the URL, it is apparent that the post was published on 2005? If you use wayback machine (http://web.archive.org/web/20060329122942/http://unenumerated.blogspot.com/2005/12/bit-gold.html), you can check yourself that in 2006, it said "December 29, 2005". Date doesn't change if you edit your blog post IIRC. It's as if he deliberately modified it a few days after the Bitcoin whitepaper was published in Meltzdowd mailing list. What doesn't stick to this story is that Nick wasn't aware of Bitcoin until 2011, when he published his first ever comment on Bitcoin (http://unenumerated.blogspot.com/2011/05/bitcoin-what-took-ye-so-long.html). It just doesn't sound right that he hadn't figured it out prior 2011, given that it was practically his life work.
• In wayback machine (http://web.archive.org/web/20060329122942/http://unenumerated.blogspot.com/2005/12/bit-gold.html) again, 2006, why is there a link to a "Bitcoin" post from the future? How can such a thing have happened? It exists in archive.is (https://archive.is/z4zLg) as well.

All have alibis and evidence that say that someone is considered to be Satoshi but in the end it comes back to a mystery that may never be revealed about who Satoshi is.

Regardless of the evidence or not in the end everything remains the same where there will definitely be doubts about the person who claims or the person who is considered as Satoshi especially with the initial goal that he wants to be someone unknown (personally) then it is very difficult to validate anything about who Satoshi Nakamoto is.

I personally don't want to speculate too much about Nick Szabo being Satoshi at the moment because it would just be a waste of time because in the end the truth will be doubted even if there is some evidence that seems convincing that he is Satoshi.

Yes having seen the answer by BHC I believe that perhaps he is right. Adam Back couldn't have been Satoshi.

Btw this conversation between all of us proves that we just speculate. I thought that Adam Back was Satoshi, but apparently he couldn't have been and I just changed my mind in a few minutes after reading the posts above.

Nick Szabo is a good candidate indeed!


I think it works the other way around. I mean if you look at the article that was written in 2010 (it's in Russian), it references BitGold, so I believe "Links to this post" links to articles that refer to BitGold.

To me, it doesn't matter either. Satoshi, whoever he is, implemented the ideas of Nick Szabo, Wei Dai, Adam Back etc. Even if he is none of the suspects, to me, the real creators of Bitcoin are those. Satoshi *just* practiced their theory, but the brilliant minds of Bitcoin are those of Nick and the rest.

The Russian article was written in 2010, but the wayback machine sends us to 2006. How could there be a link to a 2010 post in 2006? Also, the Russian article does not only refer to bit gold, but to Bitcoin (i.e., contains links to bitcoin.org). It was definitely published after Bitcoin. Something doesn't hold water here.

What was the reason to do that?

Was it in a specific post?, was it in general?

I remember reading a post where they were discussing about whether to post their real names or pseudonyms, but I don't recall reading Satoshi Nakamoto in that thread.

I am now tempted to tell you all who is Satoshi ?

I am James A Donald. I was with Satoshi Nakamoto when he first published the E-Cash Paper in the online forum and mailing list.

I am a Cryptographer, Cipherpunk and Computer Engineer. I developed an interest in e-cash in the early nineties.  I am a professional expert in financial cryptography. When I encountered Satoshi Nakamoto  online I thought he was a young Japanese man of 24 to 30. Later I discovered that he knows much more about financial cryptography and computer science than myself. So I got involved in discussing many things. Never wanted to tell me anything about his real identity.  We exchanged all the information online by forum post and P2P foundation, also in the mailing list.

One day by chance I spotted his IP address. He was careless at the beginning. I used to work for an agents in those days. This agent were interested to find out his real identity.  He found his connection to the Cipherpunk. He just made only one post in the Cipherpunk forum.

First, I thought he was from Russia but later I was convinced that He was a young Japanese man but I was wrong.  Thereafter Hal Finney jumped on in our discussion. Hal and I were in the forum for many years, I mean in the mailing list.

He wrote me more than 270 emails over the two years.  I collected all his posts as I was assigned to do that by my agent. Satoshi called himself Cyberpunk instead of Cipherpunk. He was not happy with the traditional financial system, mainly the banking services.  On one occasion he mentioned that he wanted to borrow just £20 thousand Pound Sterling to set up a business but the bank didn't give him the loan. On another occasion he told me that he was sending about £50 Pound to one of his relatives and the bank charged £19 pound fees from him. I was convinced he was from a commonwealth country and migrated to the UK or was a student in the UK.

I was right in my assumption. I discovered his IP and I was sure about his identity. When I told him about my finding, he did not reply to me for two weeks. I thought was angry with me and got offline but that was not correct. I was wrong. He was on a holiday in his native land. He was from the Asian Continent. But not from Japan. On another occasion he told me that He has a close connection to Hokkaido Island.

Then I was confused. Later Satroshi told me a story. A story of World War II. Hisd grandfather was a strategist who fought in World War II. He never told which side his grandfather fought and where he was in the war ?  Satoshi told me that he was a student of political economics and he was involved in the creation of a single currency called Euro which was launched in 1999.  I have no clues in what capacity he was involved in the creation of the Euro ?  But later I discovered that Euro was created by him as a EuroBond first in the year 1994. Later it was accepted in the Madrid EEC convention and adopted as the EU Single currency in 1995 and it took 4 years to launch in 1999. Satoshi Nakamoto is a British and a commonwealth citizen.
It means he is not English but has a close link to the British commonwealth. On one occasion he asked me if I was interested to know more about the commonwealth ?  I  was not interested.

Yes, ‘Satoshi Nakamoto’ is not his real name but it is his pseudonym. He never told me his real name but  I managed to find his identity as I was working for an agent, who was paying me for information. I was wrong for disclosing his identity to an agent. I regret the mistakes I made. I am really sorry for my own mistakes and I told Satoshi about it in November 2010. Then Satoshi asked me to contact him no more. Later he gave the project to Gavin Bell (Andresen) and others who were more trusted by him.  He moved and asked me to retire from active discussion online. Thereafter we discuss all things privately. Satoshi is still surrounded and sometimes visits the forum and mailing list.

Satoshi will come back again but may not be in the forum but some whereelse online.

It is an iconic party and a historic photo. After 7 years, it is my first time I know about these ones. Thank you.

I highly recommend everyone to read his interview too.

gmaxwell's interview in 2020 (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5262967.msg55722022#msg55722022). It's 4 years ago but it is worthy to read many times.

Exactly what came into my mind. The name is too straightforward because even complex names get deciphered. And for someone who wants privacy to the extent we haven’t heard from him since the beginning? The story may sound good and interesting but I don’t trust anything because people have different theories on about who Satoshi is. In fact all the confident claims is just enough already. For me, it’s as simple as that Bitcoin exists.

Many people are trying to solve the mystery of who is behind the scenes or the person/group acting in the name of Satoshi Nakamoto. From the start, Satoshi Nakamoto was committed to hiding his identity and remaining anonymous, it was impossible for him to provide any clues that could give other parties room to identify things that could reveal him.
Until now, no one knows for sure whether he was a man or a woman, an individual or a group consisting of several people. Various investigations have been carried out by several parties trying to reveal who the person behind the name Satoshi Nakamoto is. Even though the media and community have provided many results about who the real figure hiding behind the name Satoshi is, in reality nothing has been confirmed.

Yeah, I agree.

That's how humans brains work though. They are always trying to explain what they perceive, even if it doesn't make sense.

I think that is what is happening here. People are looking for patterns where there aren't any.

Maybe you're right, people will always be looking for him and his identity will be discussed even more during this bull cycle as bitcoin sets new ATHs. We can't or do something to stop people from looking for him. But like I said, many long-time bitcoin investors always say they respect his decision and won't bother him, but the topics about Satoshi's identity have never stopped on this forum. People are still curious and still want to know who he is, they don't want to let this go. It can be said that no one has given up their intention to stop searching for Satoshi's identity as they said.

No one truly knows the real world identity of Satoshi. These are all wild speculations having no basis in reality.


Patterns for me are everywhere

Satoshi is alive, not for sake of richness, but in happiness and for the better good for this world

It's just for verification and it's true that if he really wants to be Satoshi I think he just has to activate the account and make a thread that he is Satoshi if he really wants to be recognised because after all we must know that for now what supports being recognised as Satoshi is an account that is on bitcointalk at this time so if indeed people out there including some big names who always adorn the media by claiming or being considered Satoshi they only need to activate the account by writing that he is Satoshi then there will definitely be no arguments about it.

But until now it cannot be done which means that people who claim or are considered Satoshi will in fact remain faketoshi because no matter how hard they try to prove themselves on some social media or with evidence that is claimed to be able to convince that they are Satoshi, it will still be considered a doubt because there will definitely be many cons that occur.

Over the years, folks have pointed fingers at everyone from tech bigwigs to cypherpunks, but none of the claims have been proven. It's like playing a guessing game with no clear answer in sight.

This whole mystery adds a layer of intrigue to the crypto world, but let's be real – the technology behind Bitcoin is the real story. It's the innovation, the potential, and the impact on finance that matters, not who invented it.

Who cares who invented the wheel, right? It's the impact it had on transportation that changed the game. Same thing with Bitcoin. The tech is the revolution, and the creator's identity is just a side quest in the grand scheme of things.

I totally agree with you. Maybe at first when you learn a few things about bitcoin you wish you could knew who Satoshi is/are but then if you actually understand all the ideas behind bitcoin and how it can really change the way we manage money, you should simply respect his/their decision to be anonymous and left alone. I know some people love trying to solve these types of mysteries, I hope they'll never succeed.

Even though many of the names in the photo are unknown to me, that is an historical image because of several names that are present there at the same time. For most part I have believed Satoshi was the work of more than just one person and I still believe that.

I have seen posts by Greg Maxwell but never knew to which extent he was involved with cryptography. What I am reading about him now is impressive.

Greg Maxwell is undoubtebly one of the most knowleadgeable people on the field. I really enjoy reading his posts. I have learnt a lot from him. We are lucky to have him. Of course the list is not limited to him.

If I had to choose one of his papers that I really liked (to the point at which I could understand it):

Simple Schnorr Multi-Signatures with Applications to Bitcoin (https://nt4tn.net/papers/iacr2018068.pdf)
G. Maxwell, A. Poelstra, Y. Seurin, P. Wuille,
IEEE Designs Codes and Cryptography, 2019.

The question of Satoshi Nakamoto's identity remains one of the most enduring mysteries in the cryptocurrency world. While theories abound, the true story behind the enigmatic creator of Bitcoin continues to elude us.

The argument that Satoshi would have revealed himself to maintain Bitcoin's decentralization holds some weight. By remaining anonymous, they prevented any single entity from wielding undue influence over the network. However, it’s important to acknowledge that anonymity doesn't guarantee decentralization. The success of Bitcoin rests on the strength of its distributed ledger technology and its underlying network of users, not the identity of its creator.

The claim that governments would have easily discovered Satoshi's identity if they were two individuals seeking to obfuscate their tracks is also a possibility. However, attributing absolute power to government agencies in their pursuit of information can be an oversimplification. The complexity of international cooperation, the limitations of technology at the time of Bitcoin's inception, and the inherent anonymity of online transactions all contribute to the possibility that Satoshi could have remained hidden, even with concerted efforts to find them.

They could be doing that or maybe not, but the good thing is that they created BTC in such a way that it does not matter what they do, the network runs perfectly without the creator or any central authority; that is the beauty of BTC. Satoshi is a genius to create something like BTC, and if he wanted to be around and make himself known for all the praises, he would have done that, but he instead completely protected his privacy and never exposed it, and so it is better if we respect that.

That's the nature of man and it's practically what everyone would be thinking, @curiosity. Believe me no one is eve content with the story that a genius is hiding himself but the truth is that we all should try and just let it be as this idea is probably for the best interest of the survival of this forum and also Bitcoin at large because I know for sure that if Satoshi was to be known by the government officials am very sure that the survival and control of Bitcoin will be something that is going to be hanging by a thread.

This is always an issue that receives a lot of our attention, and it will be more exciting when the market is showing signs of positive activity, curiosity and suspicion about Satoshi Nakamoto keep recurring.
I had my share of opinions and didn't really want to commit myself to detective work  Re: Who is Satoshi Nakamoto? (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5482087.msg63520478#msg63520478)

Even if someone comes out now and claims to have complete proof of Satoshi, the crowd will not believe that it is really the person we expect. Sometimes it really feels like life is clouded by doubts, find for the truth and doubting the truth. :)

Hal Finney was the creator of BTC
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hal_Finney_(computer_scientist)#

I had a look at the Blockstream website and some other things he was involved with, I have to say his CV is impressive. In his own way he has contributed a lot to the crypto community.

That certainly is one of the many rumours out there. Hal and several others have been named as Satoshi but I guess we will never know for sure who was behind Satoshi Nakamoto.

There is a possibility that any government agency that was determined to unravel the mystery behind Satoshi had already done it because of all the powerful tools at their disposal but again, we do not know.

There might be a strong case for Nick Szabo being Satoshi but there is nothing conclusive. Reddit is known for propagating all kinds of conspiracy theories. The post by this user is vague enough to be plausible but there is no actual evidence provided to back up their claims. The obsession with unmasking Satoshi’s identity is unnecessary and puts a target on individuals who are supposedly Satoshi and their families. If the reddit user is correct and Len Sassaman, who he claims was also Satoshi, was driven to commit suicide by the CIA then that is not the kind of scrutiny that anybody associated with Satoshi deserves.

Wherever Satoshi may be, they have a right to privacy. It is their choice alone whether they want to come forward. If they have chosen to remain hidden it is perhaps to avoid harassment from obsessive cyber stalkers and law enforcement agencies.

I used to participate in threads like this one with my own opinion and arguments of who is really Satoshi. I don't anymore, and would urge others to consider doing likewise. My concern is that it brings real-world risk on the heads of those people who, rightly or wrongly, are nominated as possible "Satoshis." We don't need some deranged (or non-deranged) criminal kidnapping and torturing any of the possible Satoshis to try to get his private keys, or the widows of those nominees who are deceased.

Satoshi obviously wanted privacy, and we have good reasons for respecting that. It would not be good for bitcoin if he were outed against his will, or worse yet if something was done to him and it made the headlines.

I think it goes with the territory. If someone creates something that ends up being used by millions of people around the world and it disrupts the age old financial, investment and banking sector in a way like never before then it is normal for people to want to know who was behind the project.

To what extent Satoshi wanted privacy is not known, nor why the name Satoshi Nakamoto was chosen nor how many people were involved in creating Bitcoin. Maybe the name was deliberately chosen for reasons we do not know yet.

You posted long story with a newb account and didn't bother to offer any proof that you are in fact the James A Donald (https://dyor-crypto.fandom.com/wiki/James_A._Donald). Why is that?

Op, i am not sure why you didn't include link (https://www.reddit.com/r/CryptoCurrency/comments/1b12azf/satoshi_nakamoto_was_john_nash_the_inventor_of/) into that reddit thread, as this wasn't really convincing argument by itself.

Len Sassaman, might as well been Satoshi as his suicide seems fitting the timeline, but if there's not more evidence supporting it, so i think ThatInternetGuy is jumping to conclusions here. Also Nick Szabo & initials seems pretty cringe to me. Why the hell would Satoshi, a cryptographic enthusiast, would leave clue that could be from detective novel made for children.

But i've seen more convicing theories, like this one (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XfcvX0P1b5g). That's not a perfect theory either, and i would prefer that satoshi wouldn't be around.

In an attempt to determine Satoshi Nakamoto's true identity, there are several speculations, and individuals are collecting information and connecting the dots. Come on, people—don't you get tired of doing this? I mean, Satoshi would be happy to disclose himself if he so desired. Perhaps, though, we ought to just respect his right to silence and be grateful that he founded this wonderful community. Everybody may be Satoshi, after all, and they can create stories on their own to become well-known or for other purposes. Perhaps Satoshi only desired to stay anonymous in order to protect himself and avoid social pressures. But in all honesty, I'm sick of reading speculative articles on who Satoshi Nakamoto really is. :'(

Some people are just so determined to find out who Satoshi is that they leave all their work and keep researching this matter. I mean, leave the man alone for god's sake. If he wanted to be known for what he did, he would never hide his identity in the first place, and if he did that, he must have done it for some reason and we should respect that. What's wrong with him staying anonymous? He gave us Bitcoin, that's enough for us.
On the other hand, some people are so desperate to prove that they are Satoshi Nakamoto such as Craig Steven Wright despite the fact that it could be a threat for them, all they most probably care about is gaining fame with Satoshi's name.

If the admin or co-admin had contact with Satoshi in the past, I don’t think that is enough for them to reveal what is true identity looks like. He might have never disclosed his real identity to them since he always wanted to remain anonymous. Just like the way he had contacts with all those bitcoin OG’s in the past without most of them or any of them ascertaining that they know his real identity, I think such is also to admin and co-admin of the forum whom he had most probably contacted when he was still very much active in this forum. The fact that his true identity is not known and his project keeps evolving makes it more exciting and curiosity centered on who this genius is actually.


Not everyone will respect him by allowing him to remain anonymous forever. Knowing who the true Satoshi is will be one of the most joyous moments for some people especially the bitcoin enthusiasts. He can chose to remain anonymous forever but for wanting to be that will be what some people will use to even want to  unravel who he is actually. You can’t get everyone on the same page or agree to one thing. Let those who wants to know him continue the search, but for those that chose to respect him, let them be also. Nothing is unintentional, there must be a purpose and I hope if they get to achieve that purpose it doesn’t put him or bitcoin in danger. If it will put any of the aforementioned in danger, it is better he never gets found or known.

It's true, and I didn't understand why these folks couldn't respect others' privacy—can we simply go with the flow? It is crucial that we recognize that Satoshi made a conscious decision to remain anonymous. Instead of concentrating on the individual who created bitcoin, why don't we concentrate on the significance of Satoshi's creation, the bitcoin, and the influence it has had on our lives? Concerning those claiming to be Satoshi Nakamoto, perhaps they don't think their safety matters and that they can hurt their family since they are aware of the powerful reputation that Satoshi has or because it may draw in bad people. They are making these kinds of statements without providing enough evidence, which can be misleading and damaging to the credibility of the bitcoin community.

Four pages in and still nothing I haven't read a dozen times before.  Lame thread is lame.  Even the newbie account with the fantastical story.  It's been done. 

ebliever's is the best contribution so far:


If people can't respect satoshi's wishes, at least come up with something interesting in terms of potential candidates.   ::)

Why don't you people organize a faketoshi conference and invite all those who could be good candidates, maybe 20 or 30 or 40 people could be invited to contest in the conference against Craig Wright. Whoever will be able to produce extraordinary evidence can be proclaimed as Satoshi.  Until the  real Satoshi comes forward. This type of conference can be arranged and it will be a good fun holiday for Satoshi candidates as well as for all other participants.  There must be an expert panel of judges who will examine each candidate and in the final round one person will be crowned as Satoshi for that year as like the Miss World beauty festival.

I don't mind donating some bitcoin and participating as an execrator.  Suppose, any credible Bitcoin Leader in the forum can be trusted to create a BTC address and every candidate has put numbers of coins who are claiming to be Satoshi or other people can bet on their chosen candidate, Who will the Satoshi Contest will get the Jackpot and share with his supporters.

I can assist to create the Satoshi Contest Project  every year but you people, a number of you must take responsibility to manage the events. If the real Satoshi decides to reveal his identity then he will produce his cryptographic plus other convincing  evidence. Well the real inventor will be able to pay out the full bumper  festival of Satoshi Contest and can also award a few credible developers from genesis block, may 20 BTC first prize, 10 BTC second prize 6 BTC third prize and numbers 1 BTC prize for developers.

 Hey, Bitcoinners, Let's gather together 36 Satoshi candidates in London High Court by 14 March March 2024 and we all can claim to be Satoshi.  If you really like my advise and really come forward then I will attend to the court with you all and give a surprise visit to Craig and the COPA members in the Court. I will choose the best 3 candidates out of all 36 and provide  them with a little evidence to claim and it will be good fun.

Every one must bring a Satoshi Mask to wear, so no body will know anybody for privacy if you prefer that.

Satoshi Nakamoto was most likely the physicist and defender of human rights: Valery Chalidze (1938-2018)

Powerful clues: his 2000 book --> Entropy Demystified: Potential Order, Life and Money // especially chapter 11.

The book is no longer available in paper format, but is available on waybackmachine as a pdf. I don't know if I can put the link here so search for "Valery Chalidze twitter", you'll find on X a compilation of his work and the link to the book.

Satoshi Nakamoto was not a computer scientist by trade in my opinion but a physicist, like Isaac Newton. I invite you to watch Jack Miller's latest video, which corroborates this thesis.

Ignore this bozo, this is NOT James Donald (1st hand knowledge)

I agree with both of you, but on the other hand, wouldn't it be more harmful to leave this "identity discovery" to malicious people alone? Satoshi's posts are open for public scrutiny. It is already apparent by now that there is a host variety of theories and evidence, such that nobody can be certain about a particular individual. I don't think that would be possible if simply curious people weren't involved in this.

I like thinking it as cryptographic security, wherein well-intentioned people attempt to break it, to ensure it is unbreakable. Not sure it is a good analogy, though.

For the vast majority of 'Satoshi seekers' their hunt for Satoshi has failed before it starts.  An amateur researcher's biggest Achilles heel is themselves, their own preconceptions, bias and assumptions. A good example is the fact almost everyone goes on the hunt for Satoshi, the person that created Bitcoin, a single person. Not Satoshi the university project or Satoshi a group of Cypherpunks or Satoshi a father and son project.  The assumption Satoshi is one person is grave mistake.

If Satoshi is more than one, lets say 2, and they alternate posting to forums and/or edit the others posts before sending then no traditional linguistic study is going to work. The assumption that Satoshi changes from American English to Commonwealth English to muddy the waters on purpose is just that, an assumption. OPSEC: Satoshi used TOR and anon email services as the primary source of obscuring their/his/her identity. Saying very little about themselves was the secondary method.

On two occasion's 'Satoshi' made particular mention of their/his/her abilities with writing, saying they were better at coding than writing. This could be a bone thrown in the opposite direction, or the truth. Satoshi also mentioned working. Those are just two of only a few instances where 'Satoshi' made a comment that was of a personal nature.

"Satoshi' didn't want to be found, and still does not want to be found.

"Be careful what you wish for.".as the popular saying goes, because it may not be the Satoshi we want.. some think its Nick Szabo, Len, or Hal or all three.
If it did turn out to be one of those guys then I'm sure Bitcoin would get a small boost. But what if 'Satoshi' is someone that is perverted, or just a nasty piece of work, or someone like Craig Wright.. a delusional, a-hole. Fortunately one thing we can relax about is Satoshi is NOT Craig Wright. But you see what I mean, we may not get the Satoshi we want.

Bitcoin works best when we don't know who Satoshi is. We can go on the hunt to satisfy our own curiosity, but trust me, your time is best spent doing something else, Satoshi has made sure the search is almost impossible. Also, just imagine if you did discover who 'Satoshi' is and you blabbered it all over the internet, and it wasn't the good Satoshi everyone was hoping for, do you really wanna be 'that guy' that crashed Bitcoin.. you'd be on the run for the rest of your life. Perhaps that's a little over dramatic :)

Satoshi is anon for a bloody good reason and Satoshi needs to remain anon. Lets just focus on who is NOT Satoshi so we can rid the crypto community of those a-hole scammers.
Rant off. :)

We are not getting closer to discover the real name behind Satoshi, nor do we know anything about why Satoshi chose that name. Even though quite clearly nobody will be able to answer the question the thread has been created to ask (Who was Satoshi Nakamoto?), it has been an experience reading some of the replies and the theories  ;D

I will stand by my previous opinion, we do not know how many people were involved in creating Bitcoin and were behind the Satoshi name.

I think that after so many years, and a topic that has been discussed countless times, this should be an introspective question, rather than looking for literal answers, the answer to that question is; yourself.

The theory that this person came up with is very interesting especially the initials of S and N which as you can see it is the same with sstoshi Nakamoto. I don't know what that person will say or reply if we ask that person to prove his theory that Nick is really Satoshi Nakamoto. It is also doesn't make sense if Bitcoin is created for the purpose of having anonymity then leaving initials defeats the purpose so I don't think that nick is Satoshi himself. If Nick can access the email that is used in correspondence with siriud then i'll believe that it's him.

I guess I can see some sense in that reasoning.  Kinda like making the 'signal to noise' ratio worse by having a greater variety of noise-makers.  Most of the people who openly speculate about it are probably miles off and just throw others further off the true scent of the trail.  

---

Then all I can say is that people in this topic have a very strange definition of the word "interesting".    ::)

I'd call it "inane".

If Bitcoin was created by Nick alone, then we would all know about it, Nick would make sure of that.
There would be no Satoshi, the author would be Nick Szabo.
However Nick is not Satoshi, but he certainly knows who is, or was, behind the creation of Bitcoin.

I think it is the greatest secret of this century. Maybe they will make movies after discovering his identity. Why doesn’t he reveal his identity and shock the world? He will have status and respect from the whole world. I love him very much for his special discovery, but I would prefer him to contact me personally to ask him for some Bitcoin.

Nobody really knows if satoshi really planned on beign anonymous from the start or even had thoughts that bitcoin would he this big today, its hard to tell if he was just some secondary school nerd with a brilliant idea and some obsession or if he is a more advanced person with some status.

I'm not convinced that he was nick szabo and decided to use NS as a basis for his new anonymous name, like if it was planned he would have better left no trace of his original name or even use the first letters for the new name, he was smart for sure, so if he wanted to disappear he woudl leave no trace especially not one that would be easy to decode with a hint.
But there is every possibility that he didn't have total anonymousity in mind and must have had a few friends that knew him or probably wasn't planning to disappear from the start.



Quite long and I don't think anyone would be going through such stress to make it up unless just to point fingers elsewhere, and it's also possible that he wasn't even chatting with the real satoshi or maybe it was someone he had disclosed the idea to earlier, and I think this project might also have had some kind of sponsors.

The truth is when it comes to the mystery of who satoshi was there are so many possibilities of persons it might be and we might have even guess right before or his person has not just even surfaced to anyone.

I'm almost convinced Edward Snowden is Satoshi

I love it when people create accounts just to post this :P
Since we all speculate here, do you wanna elaborate? How have you come to this conclusion?

Eh... On a second thought, the more curious people involved, the greater the chances something really constructive and convincing is on the table (like this one (https://likeinamirror.wordpress.com/2013/12/01/satoshi-nakamoto-is-probably-nick-szabo/)). And also, we shouldn't be try to break security that cannot be restored (as opposed to cryptography), so I take it back as an analogy.

I mean, it can be an unplanned coincidence. The fact that "NS" is the starting letters of both Satoshi Nakamoto and Nick Szabo is the last piece I would call "evidence" if I ever supported that conspiracy theory.

Thanks for asking.

1. Considering Satoshi has kept himself a secret for so long despite so much intrigue as to who he is, it probably makes sense that he was a spy. So that's matches Snowden.

2. Whoever created bitcoin was an expert in cryptography. Snowden worked for the NSA which does a lot of cryptography and he had access to the latest cryptographic research projects.  He also used advanced cryptography to create multiple layers of encryption for the documents that he took from the NSA in order to stop them falling into the wrong hands. He used multiple 4096 and 8192 bit encryption keys for example. This is all detailed in his book the Permanent Record. To this day no one has managed to access the files that Snowden stole, apart from Snowden when he gave heavily redacted versions to the newspapers. This top secret info has been outside of the NSA for ten years now, and no foreign government have gotten their hands on it. Not one US service man had come a cropper due to Snowden's leaks. Snowden distributed the multiple encryption keys in a way not dissimilar to how blockchain works. Again, there is a paragraph about this in his book, i can quote if you like.

3. Timeline. Bitcoin started to be developed around 2008/2009, this is around the same time that Snowden started to suspect the Government were badly misbehaving around surveillance. He started to develop a radical libertarian philosophy. This obviously led to him becoming a whistleblower but might also have motivated Satoshi to hit overreaching governments where it hurts, their currencies.

4. Necessity. When Snowden was on run from the US Government he could only pay in two ways, cash or bitcoin. He used Bitcoin in his escape. Maybe this wasn't a lucky break for Snowden. Snowden leaked the documents in May 2013, only a few months after Bitcoin had gained some monetary value and became useable as an underground currency. Maybe he realised some years before that he would very much like a P2P e-cash when he eventually blew the whistle? Maybe he decided to create it.

5. Snowden has a ton of Bitcoin and i mean a ton. Snowden mentioned to a journalist in Hong Kong in 2013 that he had been sent enough Bitcoin and I quote "to live on until the fucking sun dies". At that time Bitcoin was trading at around $1,000 a bitcoin. If he already had enough Bitcoin then to live on for the rest of his life and then some, it means he had and has a lot of Bitcoin. And it also is unlikely people would have donated him that much bitcoin. Also note, this quote by Snowden was meant to be off the record but the journalist included it in the article. Satoshi also has enough bitcoin to live on until the fucking sun dies.

6. Snowden was aware of the risks of being exposed due to semantic analysis (recognising patterns of language). Satoshi's forum posts are notably bland and devoid of personality and style. This is clearly by design and Snowden used the same approach when communicating with journalists before he leaked the NSA documents. There is a reference to Snowden's awareness of this risk in a Washington Post article titled "Code name "Verax": Snowden in exchanges with Post reporter, made clear he knew risks." Google the article if you like.

7. Snowden keeps saying same things Satoshi said in his tweets. like the recent Snowden tweet on Feb 18th. "If you don't believe me or don't get it, I don't have time to try to convince you, sorry". this obviously could just be Snowden playing homage to Satoshi, but still it's weird to just quote someone else without making it clear you're quoting someone else. Most people who are quoting someone will reference the person they are quoting. But you wouldn't if you were quoting yourself.

In my humble opinion, the best way to scientifically prove some connection between Satoshi Nakamoto's and some other real people, would be to:
(a) create a dataset with his posts
(b) use linguistic ML models to identify patterns between his, and other notable cryptographers' writing.
(c) use sentiment analysis models (deep neural networks) trained by his posts to identify emotional patterns. However, this  is very difficult. Satoshi was calm and scientifically accurate. He didn't use his language to produce "noise". He wasn't arrogant. So we should face issues with this "emotional analysis approach".
(d) finally, we should use the same models to run some test datasets of posts collected by other scientists' posts.


Ok, sounds like you have some reasons to believe that. 
What's funny is that Snowden lived in Japan from 2009 till 2011^[1].
Satoshi Nakamoto is clearly a Japanese name.
But, of course, the first Bitcoin block was mined in Jan 3rd, 2009, so the timeline doesn't really explain this.

As I said, we all speculate here. In my opinion, there is no reason to speculate, but I find it a natural human behaviour to want to find out who Satoshi is. It's our curiousity that leads us there.

---

[1] https://www.japantimes.co.jp/news/2016/06/04/national/nsa-whistleblower-snowden-says-u-s-government-carrying-out-mass-surveillance-in-japan/

Anyone can frame anything he or she like to frame and post it online, with what I read so far I'm not convinced that the original poster of that comment is any associated with satoshi nakamoto or be the relative, its just I'm I can create any account of mine in any social media and began to claim how close I'm with satoshi nakamoto whereas I don't know satoshi and I can't tell any autobiography of satoshi, provided that Internet is in existence, different blackmail and false stories and gist will continue to happen.

From my own perspective, I assumed that satoshi is in bitcointalk and abandon his satoshi account so that nobody will contact him for anything, I'm not of the opinion that satoshi is late or not..let just not to be giving some online statements attention, especially the ones that have no proof or evidence to backup their theory.

I don't know who he is but if Forbes still counted him as the owner of 1 million Bitcoin, he would be worth $72.5 billion right now, making him the 21st richest person on Earth, as of today.

This is a very good point.

It is quite insane to think that the person who started Bitcoin, the best investment of the last decade by far, and assuming he controls a lot of those coins, he would still not be the richest person on Earth.

Makes me wonder how on Earth the other 20 people got so much money.

I think that level of centralization of fiat is partly the reason why Bitcoin was invented in the first place.

Plus, the forum does have strict rules against doxxing, which is what people are attempting to do every time they start one of these topics.  I don't see why satoshi should be considered an exception to the rule.  If it were anyone else, mods would likely be locking or nuking the thread.

//EDIT:  Case made here (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5488566.msg63794457#msg63794457) for the rule to be equitably enforced.

These are ridiculous arguments to even have a slight certainty. But, besides that, you ignore a crucial part. Satoshi's and Nick Szabo's texts have been run as inputs in reverse textual analysis, and are strongly connected (https://likeinamirror.wordpress.com/2013/12/01/satoshi-nakamoto-is-probably-nick-szabo/). For your theory to make sense, either Edward has to pretend to be Nick (which is another level of ridicule), or Edward's texts are more connected than Nick's (which is not the case as far as we're concerned).

Fair. I hope I haven't violated it. I'll stop talking about it.

this topic is not doxxing..
its just random twits speculating their hallucinations of their preferencial desires of how they see their god like entity.. 99% cant even be bothered to even check the publicly available info as it is,

actual doxxing is revealing real life location and personal data which can lead to actual real life negative interactions/repercussions

EG
compared to the random speculation of this topic.. even saying blackhatcoiner is from greece is still not doxxing.
compared to the random speculation of this topic.. even saying blackhatcoiner uses a computer in a room with blue painted walls is still not doxxing

however revealing his street address, door number, home telephone number and place of work would be
isnt that right angelo

..
the foolishness of these topics arise when people start dreaming up such speculative nonsense, that the nonsense goes viral and result in idiots like CSW claiming they are SN, or the other idiots trying to pretend their cult leader created bitcoin.

EG 'satoshi was a team of people' .. 2015 .. CSW: 'i was part of a team that made bitcoin'.. and we are now seeing how thats playing out(facepalm)

To the letter of the rules, no one has.  But in the spirit of the rules, I think we've all been guilty at some point.  Myself included.  There's no denying it's fun to speculate.  But it's also irresponsible and could have serious repercussions.  Whatever is decided, rules-wise, I won't be playing any further part in these guessing games and would strongly encourage others to do the same.

Personally, I accept what you say. I will stop speculating about it.
I think you may exaggerate a bit, but it's obviously for good reason.

It's entirely circumstantial but that doesn't make it ridiculous. What is ridiculous is trying to prove who Satoshi is through semantic analysis when there are so few forum posts to analyse and when he clearly guarded against this by deliberately writing blandly.

Nobody will ever scientifically prove who Satoshi is, hence why one needs to think more creatively. All the other strong candidates are most certainly not Satoshi as they have been pored over endlessly by the entire web for 13 years and there is nothing more than circumstantial evidence to suggest it is them. However there is more circumstantial evidence to suggest it is Snowden. He had the skills, the motives and means. He has an earth shatteringly large amount of Bitcoin. And he knows better than almost anyone how to remain digitally anonymous.

But the hipsters choice is that it can't be anyone who is already famous. It has to be some obscure cryptographer living in their mom's basement. Someone with the brilliance of Satoshi is most certainly not whittling away their lives inconspicuously, they are probably very prominent in some field or maybe many, in a way that would give them a large profile. How many people as brilliant as Satoshi do you know are living the life of a regular civilian, going completely unnoticed by society?

But if I'm completely wrong in saying that Snowden ought to be considered a serious candidate for Satoshi then tell me why? What are the reasons to exclude him?

We are seeing many people claiming that they are Satoshi Nakamoto both on this forum and outside the forum, we don't know what these people stand to achieve in doing so, maybe they are even scammers or people trying to rush into fame and get recognized in so doing, the simple and easiest way of confirming or proving that they are is something common but none of them could sign a message here on bitcointalk, but they can be making nuisance around that they are actually Satoshi when they are not.

I feel guilty only in the sense that I've engaged in such discussions, and posted a few comments on the given evidence. Maybe I shouldn't, and it's exaggerated as told by apogio. I have never analyzed or brought anything new to the table, so I can sleep easy in that sense.

This. Is. All. We've. Got. Texts from emails and the forum is all the information known by Satoshi. No person knows anything beyond that. We don't know if he was writing "blandly", that's on your hypothesis.

Lol, man. Just lol. You just found another candidate. Skills, means, mindset, profile, whatever. These are coincidences. Strong evidence involves scientific analysis.

Not who was Satoshi ? You should ask or state '' Who is Satoshi Nakamoto ?  

If you are new here in the forum the ask to my clone ''Theymos'' he will tell you the story of Satoshi Nakamoto.  After that stop speculating on the creation of Bitcoin and its creator.

https://www.coindesk.com/policy/2024/03/12/craig-wright-committed-perjury-in-uk-trial-over-satoshi-claims-copa-says

This person seems to know too much to be true... He claims no one owns Satoshi's wallet, but how can he be so sure about that? I don't think it's possible to be so assured of the current localization of Satoshi's Bitcoins. And even if the owner had to get rid of hard disks, it's not certain he would get rid of a wallet replenished by Bitcoins as well... Of course the possibility exists, but it's not a guarantee, anyway.

Unless the man who committed suicide, Len Sassaman, was Satoshi. Then it would make sense to say "no one owns Satoshi's wallet", since the poster mentions that and right after points out Len Sassaman got his door knocked by CIA, got paranoid and committed suicide. At least by my interpretation, it implies he owned the wallet back then.

The suicide story is kinda intriguing too. This version says the man was paranoid. On the internet we can also find he had neurological issues and loss of passion for life (depression?).

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=29731438  (https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=29731438)

If I am the one who created Bitcoin then I would make sure that it will be known to anyone who knows about cryptocurrency instead of using different name or alias and then later on will claim that I am the one who created Bitcoin. It should have been as what you have explained where the author would be Nick Szabo and not Satoshi Nakamoto. It is possible that he is doing it for a certain reason and to do it is which he will claim that he is Satoshi Nakamoto and letter S and N is based on his name (which we all know that it's only a coincidence that the initials are both S and N.